DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Browns Salary Cap

Thanks for that political post in the Pure football forum. We all appreciate that.

I didn't need to use purple did I?

I don't follow your logic. The rarest commodities cost the most. Once you've found them, you try to keep them. They are expensive, but they should be. (Economically speaking, and a lot of our FO's training/schooling was in economics, so I imagine much of their thinking is in economic terms.) I'm guessing the FO's planning has taken it into account. QB's seem to have the biggest impact in results, so they were seemingly willing to set aside the biggest chunk of the cap space for the position. I imagine they have different sized chunks of cap space designated for different positions.

I don't think over paying is the only way to improve as you seem to imply. Now we've got to get better at developing talent. If the right piece is available at the right price, and fits the positional cap percentages they've put in place, they may foray into FA. I expect them to look for more value signings than marquee names, though. I do wonder if Schwartz' input has shifted the percentages any, perhaps leading us to invest a large amount in one DL.

Winning free agency rarely ends in winning championships. The ability to develop players and find undervalued ones does. Any more though, you seem to need a great QB to have much of any chance. Hopefully we do have one now.

It wasn't that long ago when I read articles on here espousing how teams were trying to win the SB with QB's on rookie contracts because the theory was once you assigned a big slice of your team salary to one player (star QB) it was so much harder to win.

As I said - 2 years from now we'll know the reality.

When you have the big QB deal, you have to have lower costs somewhere to cover for that big deal. For 3 years now, Berry has been cheap with the DL, LB, and WR to have carryover cap. Berry got his QB but his areas of being cheap has been exposed as a serious weakness. I have no idea what Berry is going to do to fix the issues the Browns have but if he restructures Watson as predicted he'll have the money to spend. My worry though is the Browns will be at a minimum 30M over the projected cap in 2024 and could go as high as 70M depending what Berry does. I have a sneaking suspicion that Berry will make one big splash and go cheap everywhere else again so he has carryover cap to cover the 30M the Browns will already be over the projected cap for next year after restructuring Watson.

Browns have automatic right to restructure Deshaun Watson’s contract

There’s an important reason why quarterback Deshaun Watson is reportedly open to a restructuring of his contract. He has no choice.

Per a source with knowledge of the contract, the Browns have the right to convert “any portion” of Watson’s compensation (salary, bonuses, etc.) into a signing bonus, in any year of the contract.

This year, Watson has a $46 million salary and a cap number of $54.993 million. With a minimum salary for Watson at $1.08 million, $44.92 million can be converted to a signing bonus and prorated. That would push $33.69 million to future years, and it would drop Watson’s cap number to $21.3 million.

If the Browns want to spread the amount for more than the remaining years of the deal, a renegotiation would be needed. For example, the Browns and Watson could add a voidable year.

For now, though, the Browns can create $33,69 million if the team chooses, by converting most of his 2023 salary into a signing bonus. Whether Watson wants to do it doesn’t matter. Even though every dollar of the contract is fully guaranteed, it’s always better to have the money than to not have the money.

One last point — even though the money would become a signing bonus, it’s not subject to forfeiture in the usual sense. Per the terms of the deal, any potential forfeiture of the money converted to signing bonus ends when the next regular season concludes.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.c...to-restructure-deshaun-watsons-contract/

Steve I have to say that after reading your posts I know more about the cap than I ever did although I don't know if I could pass a quiz on it LOL!! I'm going to offer an opinion on what I feel went wrong putting us in the spot we're now in. I like AB and am happy we have him for a GM. I believe the FO and we the fans, thought we had our franchise QB in Baker. So, we began to sign our best players to 2nd contracts and extensions and that made sense. If you have your franchise QB you want to put a good OL in front of him and the weapons he needs along with some good D players because your window is open right now and maybe the next 2 years. Well, as we all know Baker wasn't it so now you have to go out and get a franchise QB which we did, who now has to be paid. We kind of put the cart before the horse but again I don't feel it's our FO's fault. Baker was fool's gold so to speak and now we are in a jam because of it. I fully believe AB is the right man to get things right. The thing that worries me is that right now the AFC is loaded with top QB's and talented teams. IT's probably one of the most difficult times for us to get to the SB. There are 6-7 good teams we will have to beat out. We will have to start replacing some of our best players in 2 or 3 years especially on the O-line and others may start slowing down. WE could be in a rebuild in 3 years if the right moves aren't made and even then I don't know if we can win the AFC. I remember that about 2 years ago many felt we had as much talent as anyone in the league. WE didn't know it then that we didn't have our franchise QB. JMO

The Browns are not in a bad spot. The cap can be manipulated and that has been true for all kinds of teams in the league for many years now.

That's good to know. Being able to do so will certainly help us out. AS I've stated I really believe we have the right guy in AB running things.

^This. Barry said it himself in the NFL Combine thread news. It's basically funny money as long as they pay everyone like they are supposed to.

Wait and see my friends. Funny money or whatever you want to call it has to be accounted for sooner or later. When the bill comes due there will be fan favorites being given their walking papers and some key star players because some players can't be let go because of the high dead cap the Browns would have to absorb - and it's coming faster than most would think as soon as next off season.

I'm not saying we aren't in cap hell over the DW contract because we are. But that was the gamble. I'm saying that we will easily be able to get under and still make moves. I have no idea how we can actually pay for those deals, but it sounds like Berry does, and that's all we need.

Will fans really be surprised when Bitonio, Teller, Chubb, Cooper and either Emerson or Newsome (Newsome likely the odd man out) are not on the roster come 2025? This is a large amount of cap space with minimal dead cap hit.

Seems obvious how Berry is setting up the team for the future.

Also, it's about time we have "good team" problems!

Yep. We got good team problems, so let's hope the good team shows up.

The assumption is that the Browns will be good in 2023 and 2024 according to your post. That's an unknown at this time an though we'd like to think that - it's an unknown. What I do know though is that your assumption that those moves will happen in 2025 is a year later than when such moves will begin to happen.

Nothing is guaranteed.

Teller and Chubb could be moved in 2024. Would not be surprising.

Again, all of this seems obvious.

curious to see how we restructure Watson's cap.

I think that is where most people are at. We know issues are going to be there, just like there have been issues for other teams for years. Yet, we are being force-fed multiple Salary Cap Apocalypse stories multiple times daily in several threads. It's great you find it so fascinating, but maybe you could keep you obsession w/the cap in this thread and stop trying to turn every single thread into a salary cap thread? I am not saying this in a mean way. I am simply asking that you consider that most people don't want to discuss a topic more than any other when the bottom line is that we "wait and see."

You can call it wait and see, but when you restructure those contracts to make cap room for one year, that bill comes due the next year, and so on and so on. Until you run out of years to push it down the road. That much you don't have to wait and see about. What happens when you're paying tens of millions to watson under this current contract when you're still paying tens of millions to him under his old contract at the exact same time? You can't continue to restructure his old contract after it expires. That's supposing he stays here after his current contract. The Browns could end up paying him tens of millions a year for a couple of years after he's gone.

Well maybe everyone is in agreement then ? I don't know. Maybe people are just writing from different levels of perspective or expectation.

I worry about the Cap situation because we have many many good players we drafted - Bitonio, MG, Ward, Newsome, Chubb - they are the reason we are good "today"/"Playoff year with BM" ... and I think Salary Cap pressures created by DW's contract mean we're going to have a good QB on a HUGE salary and the rest of the team is going to then suffer.

I've read so many posts from so many people that imply the salary cap is a non-factor. It's manipulated. Everyone does it and Berry is smarter and better at it than anyone.... the IMPLICATION being we can have our cake (DW) and eat it too (keep our good players, sign top FA's).

What I see more of now is a seeming shift from the posters implying the Cap is a non issue and implying Steve has a bee in his bonnet for no reason .... to people seemingly saying we can manipulate the Cap to keep Watson but it'll come at the cost of many/all/some of the really good players we have relied on for the last 4 years.... which to me is essentially admitting/agreeing the contract we gave DW is going to have an enormous impact on the team and what we can afford to pay/keep players.

Not one person has said the salary cap is a non-factor. Some of us have argued that it the constant doom and gloom forecasting by a couple of guys who are still butt hurt about Baker is overblown.

Teams make tough decisions all the time. Some of us trust Berry's ability to make those decisions more than we trust guys like you.

If only your explanation were honest and real. But it's not. Once again it's you who can't get Baker out of your brain. Sad, just sad.

At the time, the alternative to paying Watson was not having an upper tier QB.

What percentage of the salary cap do you think the QB should have?

Steve's argument seems to be that since we spent a lot of money at QB, we won't be able to spend a lot of money on (insert position). Well, if we spent the money on (insert position,) we wouldn't have been able to spend a lot on a QB. To me, if you're going to spend a lot on one player, QB is the place to do it. Having bad QB play isn't going to win a team a Super Bowl. Without a good QB, a team is essentially conceding that they're not going to compete for a title and in some ways are wasting their money on all the other players. The league and its rule changes have made the game more and more QB centric.

You mean the Browns have guaranteed 100 million more than any other team in the NFL to its QB. We both know a contract is actually only worth the money that's guaranteed in the contract.

I'm trying to give steve a bit of a break. I've been known to continue an argument because I "knew" I was right. It's easy to get caught up in that and lose sight of whether or not the argument is worth having.

Yes, money spent one place can't be spent somewhere else. Perhaps instead of rehashing this fact from different perspectives, we could move on to people commenting on how they would allocate the cap position-wise, without considering specific players.

Non-guaranteed money still counts against the cap.

It certainly does. It does not however have to be placed in an escrow account at the time of signing the contract. That's where the 100 million more part comes in.

I wasn't directing that towards you. I actually agree w/your takes on the subject. I just think it's beyond absurd to think that teams are not going to pay a top qb.

j/c

Patrick Mahomes will account for 22.7% of the Chiefs adjusted cap for 2023. DeShaun Watson will account for 22.29% of the Browns cap before any re-structuring. (link) Yet, Mahomes deal was lauded as a great deal for the Chiefs, and Watson's deal is bemoaned as a horrible thing for the Browns.

Like most things, perspective has an influence.

Who says otherwise?

j/c:

A poster on the outside looking in on this conversation sent me a DM pretty much encapsulating the back n forth. Seems pretty spot on the me....

This.

I argued this before Baker was gone. Cash in the assets, move up in the draft, start stretching your spending towards the higher end of the cap. What I (we) got in return was an owner basically pushing almost all the chips in. The chips that are left belong in the middle of the table. Here's my opinion as to why...

This is a real simple flowchart... all the bickering about cap, cap space, "kicking the can", etc, are ancillary arguments.

First box:

Will Deshaun work out? With working out meaning returning to upper-echelon, pretty-damned-near-elite level of play. It either happens or it doesn't right?

So the next two boxes are:

YES. When "yes" happens you have a team capable of competing for the playoffs and championships for as long as his skills are intact. Then... mid-level free agents flock to you... you get your pick of the litter on reasonable contracts because everybody wants a ring. What is the first response from nearly every player (in every sport) once they are in the open market? "I want to go to a team that has a chance to compete for a championship". Top level talent is not much different other than the price tag is more stable (and higher) across the league. But make no mistake -- they nearly always choose Team A over Team Blah... You also, in many cases, have a roster full of players willing to restructure, take "less" and bend a little more than players on a crappy team. Good players on crappy teams want OUT. A less than stellar cap situation becomes much more manageable on a good team than on a bad one.

NO. If Deshaun is a "bust", where does that leave us? Very simple... screwed. To use a business term - bankrupt. Paying a QB too much money, up against the cap, no one wants to wear your colors... right?

So what then?? Chapter 11.

Very simple question... If you are going to crash and burn, does it matter how much you owe?? In a sports league, you strip down to bare bones and your creditor offers you discounts (high draft picks) to get back in the game. Some may even argue that the worse the situation is, the better... makes the turnaround faster. No wishy-washy trying to compete... set it all on fire and start over.

That is the game, here and now, in Cleveland. It was the second Baker got his b-a feelings hurt and wrote the letter. There was no plan 'B'.

Jimmy decided he was done sitting at the little-guy table and stepped into the high roller room. High rollers don't push 90% of their money into the middle and try to play frugal with the last 10% over concerns with 'rent money'.

Thanks for that update of an opinion from a single outsider. That carries a lot of weight. Oh, no it doesn't. Never mind.

Can we encourage this lurker to provide occasional recaps like this? I'd say one every eight posts should suffice. At least there would be some comedic value to help us all get through this thing.

Right? It was pretty good! I'll encourage him to post more.

As long as he includes the consideration that most who post on this board are inclined to think winning at all costs is the answer and the future be damned is their train of thought.

Aaaaand... back to the beginning.